just grabbed a hard cover of Fury MAX (amazing read!) with guest appearances by a Frank Castle and a one BARRA FUCKING CUDAAA!

seriously though, the cuda exclusives were pretty fun, I mean damn the only other story that is as clear cut Hollywood casting is the 'end' of the Punisher MAX with the SF Morgan Freeman commander character.

Next on the list would be the daredevil MAX run I hear kingpin is pretty cut throat in that one and O'brain jumps in too.

>>43373idk Ennis is genius for sure but can get a little wacky at times pic related

So I'm looking forward to Gunnm, the first trailer is out. I had a short contact with Yukito Kishiro kami before, but he can not say anything about the contract with James Cameron. Here is an original cel from the anime. I hope you like ithttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZFn82rqogA

why? the visual direction looks generic and lifeless, the acting is incredibly awkward and corny, and the whole thing feels cheap as hell in general. I went into the trailer with a positive outlook but I just couldn't keep it up by the time it was finished. Comparing some of the amazing spreads of the scrapyard and excellent cyborg designs in the comics to the scifi channel tier sets and cgi was particularly depressing. all the personality and soul has been stripped away here. I knew to be worried the moment Cameron deferred the movie to Rodriguez, but I tried to stay positive because I liked some other stuff Rodriguez had done, even if this wasn't a passion project for him like it was for cameron. The trailer proved that futile though. I just wish it wasn't such a good comic they were mucking up.

>>43478Re-reading it right now. It's pretty cheesy in general. But it does it in a really enjoyable way. Like it doesn't take itself serious and goes hard. I feel like that is a perfect fit for Rodriguez

Hey guys, long time lurker thanks for everything so far. Can anyone please help me find this comic "My Friend Dahmer by Derf Backderf" I've been looking all over and can't find it. Not even bookz has it and they have everything.

>Marvel is a money hungry corporation, it will never give up this contrast in the name of narrative coherence or writing good stories.

Not that I disagree with your overall point that general society in the MU should stay the same (although the way it's executed DOES make various "heroes" look like incompetent wankers), but when comics make as little money in the grand scheme of things as they do now I don't think this mindset holds up. Would big real-world changes make a massive difference in sales? Can't say. I've heard convincing arguments for both. But in the grander scheme of things, where the comics are a glorified test-lab for other media avenues, it'd make a far more efficient money-making whole. To paraphrase Stan, "When Jack & I saw Superman & Batman, we were inspired to make Spider-Man & the FF. When new writers see Spider-Man & the FF, they're inspired to make more Spider-Man & FF". Totally disregard for the mindset behind these icons, so more icons aren't made.

>you want to change the world they live in in a way that's unrecognizable from our own too?

You think my pitch to unfreeze time somehow wouldn't effect all the characters who've been frozen in time? Again, "I'll take a fantastic setting that still feels genuine over a mundane one that's thoroughly fake." The very crux of my argument entails that problem be removed. Characters would age & retire & give way to new generations, as they were meant to. The lore wouldn't stack forever like an unassailable garbage heap or hyperactivated cancer, it would cycle through & constantly allow new accessible context to a new accessible audience. Like that real life thing you're lauding. I don't need to know a sports team's history dating back to the 1960s to get into that sports team now. It'd be enriching, but not bloody vital.

>Probably the fear to do even worse and fail completely?

See my first part. There's nothing to lose. There are rumors the comics' division already operates on a loss, and other media ventures already have 60 years of stories to draw inspiration from (not to mention ju…

>Characters would age & retire & give way to new generations, as they were meant to

Come on, you know that's risky. Old characters have decades of history.. And I'm not talking about their own messed up biographies, but real world history. They've been part of society for a long time, and that alone gives them a certain kind of popular power that would trump any well-thought out new legacy character. I don't think the name is enough, especially now that their fanbase, is, imho, mostly composed of die-hard fans who only tune in because it's something familiar. Having other characters take the mantle would mean losing some of their familiarity, and new readers aren't as reliable as old ones.

I mean, as a reader, I agree with you, and I would love for that to happen.. But from the point of view of marvel it's a risky move. I guess this rests on whether you agree with me about who's buying marvel comics now and if gaining new readers would be worth the risk of alienating some old ones..

>There are rumors the comics' division already operates on a loss, and other media ventures already have 60 years of stories to draw inspiration from (not to mention just making up their own shit). Risks hurt nobody in so small a cog of what's now so massive a machine. Marvel isn't strong? Nigga where you been since 2008? I know I know, comics =/= movies, but it's all the same corporation and all privy to the same income, investments & creative rewards.

Yeah I was only focusing on the comics' part. I don't know what to say, in theory you make sense, but then why aren't they changing things? From what I've seen, the only things the movies brought are some changes in the comics that make them more similar to the movies, either stylistically, or in terms of stories/cast. They should have the strength to dare more.. There's one caveat though. Who knows how long the movies' success will last? I'm honestly amazed it's lasted this long, and we haven't grown sick of it. I'm mentioning this because the change you're suggesting, making the characters grow older, making other character take the mantle, is som…

>>43393Retire =/= no longer show up. That'd take another good few decades. They'd also still be the focus of the relevant media outlets like film & vidya. Insofar as audiences want and producers provide.I didn't even say shit about legacy heroes. These past few years have been dire. Because the original philosophy has been forgotten. It's fanboys raised on the neverending Marvel-U trying to write something they have no grasp of. You know who did? The generation who grew up on 60s Marvel. Claremont, Englehart, Simonson, Starlin, Stern; when they wrote stories with the given cast they became iconic, and when they made new characters they were NEW. They understood the appeal of growth and development and change and lo' and behold they all start dropping off and leaving for personal projects as the 80s drew to a close & their input became counterproductive. The New Mutants weren't Cyclops Jr, II-ceman, MiniBeast etc.. The constituent New warriors took pride in their originality. The Power Pack were so subtle their purpose still goes largely unrecognized. And now they're all obscure ephemera because they never did what they were bloody created to do.

>I guess this rests on whether you agree with me about who's buying marvel comics now

Oh I agree. I just think it's irrelevant. None of ANAD's phony pandering "change" means anything, especially when done by people so incompetent. It doesn't draw the new fans & just pisses off the old. I'm saying that, if executed well (which would take an entire creative overhaul to which "back to basics" meant more than the superficial), there's nothing to lose through the risk and frankly those old entrenched fans would be the most likely to love & support it.

>I don't know what to say, in theory you make sense, but then why aren't they changing things?

> when they wrote stories with the given cast they became iconic, and when they made new characters they were NEW. They understood the appeal of growth and development and change

It's not like they had much choice though. You forget that in those times there was no Image comics, or Boom!, or Avatar, and if you wanted to work in comics you either had to starve with small, inconsequential publishers, starve by self-publishing, or work with the big two.Can you blame today's writers for not creating new character, when they'll never be compensated for that work? Why not take that new idea and spin it in a comic from which they'll get royalties instead?

Good news for comics, bad news for the big two. I mean, even the current DC rebirth is fueled by the infusion of new characters that aren't new at all, they're from watchmen. I haven't read them, but they say they're good.. But then again, since they seem to hinge on these characters, once the plot gets resolved, the mystery is gone, they take part in the DCU, and the novelty wears off, will the quality remain the same? I think DC will suffer the same difficulty, as they have the same problem as Marvel, no writer finds it worthwhile to create new characters for them.

>None of ANAD's phony pandering "change" means anything, especially when done by people so incompetent. It doesn't draw the new fans & just pisses off the old

ANAD? But yeah, if you mean chasing the tumblr crowd, that was cringy.. But then again so is the crowd. At least now they have confirmation that they just want to complain about comics, not actually buy them.

>Two parallel lines of comics where one moves in real time & the other stays the same, or dead characters people miss getting their own insular-canon spinoffs.

That would be cool, but this faces the same problem as above, and recycling has a limit.. Then again, there's a shitload of obscure marvel characters to recycle, so I can see it work, with a bit of creativity.

>Can you blame today's writers for not creating new character, when they'll never be compensated for that work?

That's a major factor, by all means. Roy Thomas had the mindset back in the 60s and is considered the template for a "Marvel writer". And the rise of Image et al. indeed contributed to a sheer drop-off in new IP. It's a matter of balance & compromise, and like I said would require an overhaul of business practice in the first place.Probably worth mentioning that DC's a different beast entirely. The Marvel Age was an explicit retort to the way DC did things, both have since copied & traded so much that they're a lot less distinct. Still, at the foundation, those characters were made to be eternal and between the way the universe is structured & the workings of Crises that's fine. At least IMO.

>ANAD?

All-New All-Different. Name of the post-Secret Wars relauch. Which went full fucking throttle with that Tumblr-chasing so it gets used as a catch-all term for the general movement.

>>43390I like DC and Marvel equally and hate Bendis I don't know how to feel about this. It'll be different, thats for sure. Hopefully Marvel uses this as an opportunity to move away from his style of comics rather than replacing him with a fucking Bendis wannabe hack fuck. Jason Aaron looked like a frontrunner a few years ago but now his books have gotten stale. Rick Re,ender and Hickman quit. Marvel is low on writers I give a fuck about now that DC has Tom King and Dan Abnett exclusively and Image has Hickman/Remender. I still follow Marvel books but the only good writer there (Al Ewing) cant get sales if his life depended on it.

>>43394Here's the thing. Ewing's only been given C-list fanboy projects.Bendis got noticed for his work on Daredevil & Ultimate Spider-Man. from that he landed Avengers, and then X-Men, and then Iron Man and GotG. His career's been a perpetual motion machine. He always gets sales because he's always on the sellers which gets him put on more sellers.All it takes is giving Ewing that opportunity. Which probably wouldn't happen anyway because his entire creative ethos is anathema to Queseda, Alonso, Brevoot, etc..